It's very far from being buzzwords and jargon. The 'game' that is presently being played-out in the financial markets is unprecedented and nobody knows what the outcomes or the consequential damage is going to be. We are tettering on the brink of a full blown global Depression (if you need references to what the effects and consequences of that are likely to be look up both the Great Depression (1930s) and the Long Depression (1880-90s). Even if we actually avoid Depression then the majority of commentators a severe recession in both Europe and the USA (the 2 are very different beasts in both their behaviour and time frames). The problem that I see with your analysis is that the continued wellbeing of your club is predicated upon the continued success of the team AND a constantly growing income stream. Now neither you nor I can guarantee the former but I can say with some confidence that the latter is seriously under threat. Additionally you have the unknown of what the Glazers see as being in their best interests. You really cannot project forward commercial results into the unknowns of future returns at this time. That is just myopic thinking in strategic terms. You should also note that I said that the situattion was not unique to United and that Liverpool are also in dangerous waters. No football club can be considered as a necessary in their present form. What I am saying is that the more options that are open the better and therein lies the difference. Time will tell which of our views is correct. As for the Chelsea/Arsenal debate. You do have to accept that both of them had the opportunity to garner more points than United at various points of last season. That they didn't was not in any way die to the strength of United. You did as well as you could and they did not. That is the point that I will continue to make. To then go on to claim that United are so much stronger is wishfull thinking.
Why do we have to accept that when you refuse to accept that United also had the opportunity to garner more points from the away games that they were expected to win?
Look at the end of the day Manchester United won the league because they got more points than any other team in the league. Surely it's as simple as that?
No we can't be having that. It must be that Man Utd are **** and only won the league because the FA, referees, the Devil and God are on their side. But ofcourse no rival fan who comes out with that nonsense is a sore loser.
But to be honest, I genuinely thought United and City were both very poor and just had moments of pure genius in between. I genuinely think that Liverpool could have easily beaten United or City yesterday. Because United just didn't show up in the first half, and City didn't come back out for the second half. Liverpool will beat United this season if De Gea continues to not command his area, because if he doesn't, Andy Carroll will command his area for him. That being said, the goal you scored with the lovely 5-a-side pass-and-move skill was a moment of pure genius, and if United can consistently do that then how many they concede will be irrelevant i'm afraid
Seriously you are basing this really on one partial performance from yesterday? This was the first real difficult game the lad has played. Also when has Carroll consistently ever commanded the penalty area when playing for Liverpool?
That is an awesome goal, but you have to wonder what the **** the defenders were doing. If the opponent has 3 players in your box then why the **** are you dancing around the outside of the box? Get inbetween the goal and the attacker for god sakes!!
99% of all goals scored are because of defender(s) not doing their job properly and usually the opposition exploiting a slight error. It was a lovely goal but it came about because noone tracked Nani for the final ball from Cleverley. Simple as that.
They were beaten by team movement, 4 players constantly changing positions is a nightmare for any defense, and to be fair City were actually defending it pretty well until Nani made the late run into the space left by the defender covering Welbeck.
Kompany is a good player but he was at fault for 2 of Utd goals yesterday and yet I fail to hear as much criticism directed towards him like it is being directed at De Gea.
I disagree. Kompany is actually very highly rated by some people. De Gea is being singled out for criticism for 3 reasons. 1. He's a keeper and its easy to highlight his mistakes. 2. The transfer fee. 3. He plays for Man Utd.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ent-Kompany-best-defender-Premier-League.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/aug/08/champions-league-beating-barcelona The media will always look at a players price tag and comment on the astronomical fees. Usually these comments will be harsh especially if the players makes a mistake. Do I believe some elements of the media dislike Man Utd? Yes and that's probably down to their run in's with SAF. Do I believe there is a massive conspiracy against Man Utd by the media? No. I'm not an Arsenal fan
You know who I thought was really good yesterday? Smalling. Not only for his defensive duties but was it me thinking he was playing RWB for the second half? he was charging up that right hand side and pulling off some great skill and deft touches. Kompany at 6million was a bargain, it is really harsh to judge on him on this one game and mistake, just as it would be to judge de gea. I can't stand nani but he is a player...... the b******.
